Blogged

41 posts categorized "Congress--Scandals"

April 28, 2010

Posted by Bill: Readers interested in how to prevent another meltdown should check out Zephyr Teachout's great piece, "C'Mon— Break it Up!" Teachout makes the case for putting reasonable size limits on the megabanks and limiting the conflicts of interest that accrue to their present status as financial supermarkets.

April 23, 2010

by Bill Kavanagh: After the President's tough Cooper Union speech on financial reform, we're left with Senator Dodd's legislation— it helps in some ways, but doesn't stop "too big to fail" banks from dominating American finance for their own benefit, just as they did leading up to the meltdown. One sliver of hope for curbing future bubbles lies in a proposed amendment in the Senate, the Brown-Kaufman SAFE Banking Act. This legislation would break up the biggest of the megabanks and require limits on non-deposit liabilities. "Too big to fail" is just too big, say the sponsors of the amendment.

If you want to prevent the next meltdown from occurring, you can help by supporting the Brown-Kaufman amendment and making sure it gets an up or down vote. Call your Senators, Harry Reid, and the White House switchboard. Tell the folks answering that you are calling to make sure the SAFE Banking Act gets a chance to come to a vote on the Senate floor— and that without limiting bank size, financial regulation won't work.

What the hell, it's better than waiting for the bank lobbyists to kill the amendment without a fight, right?

October 30, 2009

"House ethics investigators have been scrutinizing the activities of
more than 30 lawmakers and several aides in inquiries about issues
including defense lobbying and corporate influence peddling, according
to a confidential House ethics committee report prepared in July.

"The report appears to have been inadvertently placed on a publicly
accessible computer network, and it was provided to The Washington Post
by a source not connected to the congressional investigations. The
committee said Thursday night that the document was released by a
low-level staffer."

Inadvertently placed where all sorts of folks could read it? Hmmmm. A different Washington Post article has interesting details:

S. Amend. 2566 simply prohibits "the use of funds for any Federal
contract with Halliburton Company, KBR, Inc., any of their subsidiaries
or affiliates, or any other contracting party if such contractor or a
subcontractor at any tier under such contract requires that employees
or independent contractors sign mandatory arbitration clauses regarding
certain claims." The "certain claims" have to do with sexual assault....

Franken offered the amendment because a KBR employee, Jamie Leigh
Jones, age 19, was raped by a bunch of KBR workers in Iraq and then
locked up in a crate when she tried reporting them. After she was
rescued and returned to America she was informed that she couldn't take
KBR to court because there was some fine print in her -- and everyone
else's -- contracts that don't permit any such thing. [See the video
below.]

Senator Jeff Sessions of Alabama...of
the Senate Armed Services Committee, was the key spokesperson for the
GOP against the legislation which he called unfair to Halliburton, one of the biggest Republican Party contributors in history. (More at HuffPost)

October 02, 2009

by Deb Cupples | Earlier this week, Rep. Alan Grayson (D-FL) publicly said that congressional Republicans do not have a real health care plan other than 1) Don't get sick; and 2) If you do get sick, die quickly. (See the video here: it's less than 3 minutes).

Naturally, some cry-baby Republican politicians demanded an apology. Apparently, they expect other people to man-up and sport thicker skins than said Republican politicians actually have.

Deb Cupples | In June, headlines screamed about the extra-marital affair between so-called "conservative Christian" U.S. Senator John Ensign (R-NV) and Cynthia Hampton, the wife of one of Ensign's top aides. Reportedly, the Ensign and Hampton families had been very close.

Ironically, according to Think Progress, Sen. Ensign (while running for U.S. Senate) had publicly called upon Democratic ex-President Bill Clinton to resign over the Lewinski affair but did not later call upon Republican Senator David Vitter to resign over Vitter's extra-marital affair.

Incidentally, Mr. Ensign's affair was not short lived. Apparently, the two couples repeatedly discussed the ending of the affair -- and even had joint family meetings (which included the children) about the issue. Apparently, the cuckolded Mr. Hampton found out about the affair in 2006, and it continued through at least early 2008.

An article in today's New York Times discusses evidence that in order to keep Mr. Hampton from publicizing the affair (i.e., creating a scandal), Sen. Ensign may have improperly used his position and staff (i.e., taxpayer-funded resources).

September 11, 2009

by bartleby the scrivener | Eric Boehlert of Media Matters calls out the press for failing to address the fact that Joe Wilson's outburst was in sober fact entirely inaccurate, giving credit where due to Times' Michael Scherer for at least taking time to fact-check the President's Speech.

"The President's seemingly simple statement that "the reforms I am
proposing would not apply to those who are here illegally" is not hard
to check. In the Senate Finance Committee's working framework for a
health plan, which Obama's speech seemed most to mimic, there is the
line, "No illegal immigrants will benefit from the health care tax
credits." Similarly, the major health-care-reform bill to pass out of
committee in the House, H.R. 3200, contains Section 246, which is
called "NO FEDERAL PAYMENT FOR UNDOCUMENTED ALIENS." ....

"He was claiming something — benefits for illegal immigrants — that is
expressly prohibited in the major legislative efforts in both houses of
Congress. He was becoming the sideshow the President wanted to
spotlight, and as such Wilson handed a great gift to his political
enemies, for whom he clearly has little regard."(Time Magazine)

by bartleby the scrivener | Via Huffpost, here's Wilson admitting that he let his emotions get ":the best" of him (such as that is) when he insulted the President of the United States while explaining in so many words that he's a victim too. "They" want to silence him, he pleads. Give him money now!

He's even got a slogan: "Stand with Joe." Catchy! I imagine he'll have no trouble raiding the pockets of all the poor duped GOPpers who have fallen for their corporatist masters' assurances that providing free health care for everyone is eeeeeeevil.

Round here, and on that issue, we stand with Barry O whenever we can work out where that is. Certainly we stand with proponents of the public option.

July 10, 2009

by bartleby the scrivener | ...and it was strictly out of concern for her and her family's welfare, it seems. (The New York Times) Sadly -- as David Stout writes at The New York Times -- this generous gift is "sure to provide grist for political detractors," of whom I am one.

A statement by [Ensign's] lawyer, Paul Coggins, on behalf of the Mr.
Ensign, a Republican from Nevada, said that in April 2008 the senator’s
parents each gave $12,000 apiece to Cindy Hampton, her husband, Doug,
and two of their children in the form of a single check for $96,000.

“The
payments were made as gifts, accepted as gifts and complied with tax
rules governing gifts,” the statement read. Under federal tax
regulations, $12,000 is the most that a person can receive as a gift
from any one person without having to declare or pay taxes on it. (NYT)

Politico speculates that this revelation "seemed intended to head off growing questions
about whether Ensign violated federal law by failing to report what
Doug Hampton called a severance package worth more than $25,000 to his
wife Cynthia, who left Ensign's campaign staff on April 30, 2008." (Politico)

July 01, 2009

by Deb Cupples | Reportedly, numerous members of the U.S. Congress tried to help banks in their states get funds from the TARP (i.e., the Wall Street Bailout). The Washington Post tells us that Sen. Dan Inouye's intervention on a bank's behalf is a little different:

"Sen. Daniel K. Inouye's
staff contacted federal regulators last fall to ask about the bailout
application of an ailing Hawaii bank that he had helped to establish
and where he has invested the bulk of his personal wealth."

June 17, 2009

by Damozel | Let it be said at the outset that Ensign was one of those baying for Clinton's resignation over Lewinsky because, said Ensign, Clinton "had no credibility left."(Think Progress) He also called for Larry Craig to resign. (Think Progress). He also is among those who would protect the sanctity of marriage from the depredations of Teh Gays. (Think Progress). In other words, he's another right-wing hypocrite.

Consider the following:

Sen. John Ensign (R-Nev.) has acknowledged an
extramarital affair with a campaign staffer in a statement released by
his office. "I deeply regret and am very sorry for my actions," said
Ensign. He is expected to announce the affair at a press conference at
6:30 pm tonight. The affair, which was with a woman who worked for both
Ensign's re-election campaign and his Battle Born leadership political
action committee, began in December 2007 and ended in August 2008.
Ensign's wife, Darlene, said that the couple's "marriage has become
stronger" and added: "I love my husband." (Chris Cillizza & Paul Kane)

May 21, 2009

by Teh Nutroots | I mean, look, come on: they're the CIA. Do people really think that they are on close terms at all times with the truth as it might appear to you and me? Don't we all pretty much assume that they lie reflexively, whenever they need to obscure a spot of excess zeal or whatever? Don't we all reckon that they're the ultimate ends-justify-the-means agency in America? Isn't history clear on this point?

Specter didn't go quite that far, acknowledging that it isn't official CIA policy to misrepresent the facts, but he went far enough.

"The CIA has a very bad record when it comes to — I was about to say
'candid'; that's too mild — to honesty," Specter, a former chairman of the Senate Intelligence
Committee, said in a lunch address to the American Law Institute. He cited
misleading information about the agency's involvement in mining harbors
in Nicaragua and the Iran-Contra affair.

May 09, 2009

by Damozel | That Pelosi had some knowledge of the interrogation techniques from the get-go isn't exactly news. Back in 2007, WaPo published an article indicating that several top Dems were given this information at the outset and that only Jane Harman -- yes, Jane Harman -- protested. Most progressives I follow were outraged then and are prepared to be equally outraged now once we've got the facts. [See Did Congressional Democrats Condone the CIA's Secret Interrogation Program? (12-9-2007)].

Unlike certain members of the GOP, we don't have any desire to cover up or excuse the failings of erring Dems. We want to throw the rascals out and get better ones. And now WaPo asserts the following:

April 29, 2009

by Damozel | "The FBI investigates a possible corruption case involving two congresswomen, an Israeli lobby, and a popular kids' program." All she had to do to become head of the committee dealing with espionage was to help out a couple of people accused of espionage...."It's like strangling a manatee to become head of the EPA."

April 23, 2009

photo by Deb Cupples | by Damozel | On Tuesday Speaker Pelosi didn't remember being briefed on any wiretap involving Rep. Jane Harman, but it's all come back to her now. It seems there was this tradition of briefing "for the top Democrat and top Republican in the House to be alerted any
time a member shows up on wiretaps or other surveillance devices." (WaPo) And even though she did know, she wasn't "in a position" to pass on the information to Harman.

"Speaker Nancy Pelosi acknowledged today that she had indeed been
briefed about a wiretap that recorded conversations involving
Representative Jane Harman...But Ms. Pelosi said today that although she was briefed, the Justice
Department had not provided her with details and that Ms. Harman was
not the subject/target of the surveillance."

April 21, 2009

by Damozel | Mazier and mazier. It's like a labyrinth, this story: every time you think you've found its center, you find that you're heading down another twisty little alley way with no idea where the truth lies. Let's start with why she was being wiretapped.

According to The New York Times, Harman ended up on tape because she was "inadvertently swept up by N.S.A. eavesdroppers who were listening in on
conversations during an investigation, three current or former senior
officials said. It is not clear exactly when the wiretaps occurred;
they were first reported by Congressional Quarterly on its Web site."How does that happen? How does someone who was "one of the very
few members of Congress with broad access to the most sensitive
intelligence information" get "inadvertently" swept up in government
eavesdropping? My first question -- which, according to Mondoweiss,
the man who broke the story has now answered -- is how she got
"inadvertently swept up" in the first place?